Further the 'public benefit' reqiuirement is given a very wide definition. Though a charity may act in a negative way as is being argued here, in my view, this in itself would not be enough to negate the 'public benefit' positives that they state they provide.
Even if you didn't agree with the Charity Commissions decision a judicial review would be unlikely, as judicial reviews can only be argued on whether the Commission acted inside or outside of the law. In this case Parliament gives the Charity Commission decision to adjudicate, that in itself is inside the law as per the Charities Act 2011.
As for examing the process of the decision itself, so long as it was made inside the law, the Court in a judicial review would stay out of the actual decision making process, unless the decision itself was totally unreasonable under the rules of 'Wednesbury unreasonableness'.